[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <l55sz3sgogoyniecolvzscjamxqrxlzgk7w7scds3tt42z6atj@nrfvjqg2agib>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 13:53:40 +0100
From: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
Cc: 李龙兴 <coregee2000@...il.com>,
syzkaller@...glegroups.com, tj@...nel.org, josef@...icpanda.com, axboe@...nel.dk,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
yukuai@...as.com
Subject: Re: [Kernel Bug] KASAN: slab-use-after-free Read in
__blkcg_rstat_flush
On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 07:11:11PM +0800, Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com> wrote:
> RCU supports this way, here is just 2-stage RCU chain, and everything
> is deterministic.
The time when RCU callback runs is noisy, moreover when chained after
each other.
(I don't mean it doesn't work but it's debugging/testing nuisance. And
it also looks awkward.)
> I thought about this way, but ->lqueued is lockless, and in theory the `blkg_iostat_set`
> can be added again after WRITE_ONCE(bisc->lqueued, false) happens, so this way looks
> fragile.
Right, I brushed up on the cycles from the commit 20cb1c2fb7568
("blk-cgroup: Flush stats before releasing blkcg_gq") and it'd be a step
back.
Does anything prevent doing the each-cpu flush in blkg_release() (before
__blkg_release())?
Regards,
Michal
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (266 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists